Navigate:

Tea party rally has message for Supreme Court: Kill the law

Hundreds of tea party supporters rallied on Capitol Hill with the same message. | Reuters

The crowd heard from dozens of prominent conservative speakers, including Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who filed one of the first suits against the law, and Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas). While the majority of speakers declared their hope that the Supreme Court would find the law to be unconstitutional, they all said the real "road to repeal" would be at the ballot boxes in November.

“The next step here and my focus here is political,” Cuccinelli told POLITICO. “It’s to make this an issue, and [to make] the principles that underlie both the bill — and our concerns with the bill — election issues.”

Text Size

Gohmert encouraged the crowd to march across to the Supreme Court when the rally was over and to “say a little prayer.”

Instead of praying silently, the crowd marched to the Court building following the rally, chanting “Stop the tyranny” and “Repeal Obamacare.”

“There comes a time in a man’s life where you have to step up for what you believe in,” said Dean McDonald, a business owner from Atlanta. “Now is one of those times.”

Like many of the other participants in the rally, it was not McDonald’s first time coming to D.C. to protest the law.

“I offer health care to my employees,” he said. “If this takes effect, that’s done. It’ll get too expensive, with too many mandates. Free enterprise needs to take over, not the government.”

The rally kicked off what will be a week filled with events outside the Supreme Court. Supporters of the law will hold daily news conferences on the steps each day of the arguments, and Martin said there would be another organized rally against the law on Tuesday.

Outside of the court, there was already a line — which had started forming on Friday — to get one of the few seats available to the public to watch the oral arguments.

Some were being paid to hold spots in line for others. But Kathie McClure, a lawyer who had traveled from Atlanta, had a different reason for being there. She was there to support the law — and she said her family’s personal stake in health reform was the reason she was willing to sleep on the sidewalk for the weekend.

“My son has diabetes and my daughter has epilepsy. They are uninsurable in the private insurance market. Now they will be able to get a policy, and insurance companies won’t be able to exclude them. For their future, this is a huge deal. That’s why I’m here,” she said.

This article first appeared on POLITICO Pro at 4:24 p.m. on March 24, 2012.

Readers' Comments (299)

But Kathie McClure, a lawyer who had traveled from Atlanta, had a different reason for being there. She was there to support the law — and she said her family’s personal stake in health reform was the reason she was willing to sleep on the sidewalk for the weekend.

“My son has diabetes and my daughter has epilepsy. They are uninsurable in the private insurance market. Now they will be able to get a policy, and insurance companies won’t be able to exclude them. For their future, this is a huge deal. That’s why I’m here,” she said.

But Kathie McClure, a lawyer who had traveled from Atlanta, had a different reason for being there. She was there to support the law — and she said her family’s personal stake in health reform was the reason she was willing to sleep on the sidewalk for the weekend.

“My son has diabetes and my daughter has epilepsy. They are uninsurable in the private insurance market. Now they will be able to get a policy, and insurance companies won’t be able to exclude them. For their future, this is a huge deal. That’s why I’m here,” she said.

During a hearing on Capitol Hill Thursday, the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) admitted to double-counting in the Obamacare budget.

In her first appearance before the House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee since the health-care law passed, Kathleen Sebelius responded to a line of questioning by Republican Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois about whether $500 billion in Medicare cuts were used to sustain the program or pay for the law.

“There is an issue here on the budget because your own actuary has said you can’t double-count,” said Shimkus. “You can’t count — they’re attacking Medicare on the CR when their bill, your law, cut $500 billion from Medicare.”

He continued: “Then you’re also using the same $500 billion to what? Say your funding health care. Your own actuary says you can’t do both. […] What’s the $500 billion in cuts for? Preserving Medicare or funding the health-care law?

Sebelius’ reply? “Both.”

The Obama administration and HHS have been criticized previously for double-counting. In a report last summer, HHS claimed a provision in the health-care law would extend the Medicare trust fund by 12 years. The Congressional Budget Office released a memo that said HHS’s math was more than a little off.

“[…] They cannot be set aside to pay for future Medicare spending and, at the same time, pay for current spending on other parts of the legislation or on other programs … To describe the full amount of HI trust fund savings as both improving the government’s ability to pay future Medicare benefits and financing new spending outside of Medicare would essentially double-count a large share of those savings,” said the CBO memo.

“I was shocked to hear the secretary admit that $500 billion is double-counted in the health-care law,” said Shimkus after Thursday’s hearing. “We knew the health-care law’s actual cost was much greater than originally told to the public. And now, the truth is slowly coming out in administration reports and testimony.”

Rep. Joe Pitts of Pennsylvania , the chairman of the subcommittee added, “The same dollar can’t be used twice. This is the largest of the many budget gimmicks Democrats used to claim Obamacare would reduce the deficit.”

Seems to me that if the Supreme Court is to follow the Constitution, then why would a rally be necessary to try and sway their decision. The law is the law and whichever way the Court rules, I suspect they are following the Constituion in their rulling.

Which ever way the ruling goes, there will be screams of an activist court.

Seems to me that if the Supreme Court is to follow the Constitution, then why would a rally be necessary to try and sway their decision. The law is the law and whichever way the Court rules, I suspect they are following the Constituion in their rulling.

Which ever way the ruling goes, there will be screams of an activist court.

Two years later and I'm still waiting to see the Republican's alternative plan. Oh wait, thats right, they changed the chant from "repeal and replace" to just "repeal" because the insurance and pharmacuetical companies told them to. Americans may not like some aspects of Obamacare but that doesn't mean they didn't want healthcare reform in the first place. The Republican/Tea Party seems to have forgotten that.